An Automated Method for Quality Control in MRI Systems: Methods and Considerations

Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop an automated method for performing quality control (QC) tests in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems, investigate the effect of different definitions of QC parameters and its sensitivity with respect to variations in regions of interest (ROI) positioning, and validate the reliability of the automated method by comparison with results from manual evaluations. Materials and Methods: Magnetic Resonance imaging MRI used for acceptance and routine QC tests from five MRI systems were selected. All QC tests were performed using the American College of Radiology (ACR) MRI accreditation phantom. The only selection criterion was that in the same QC test, images from two identical sequential sequences should be available. The study was focused on four QC parameters: percent signal ghosting (PSG), percent image uniformity (PIU), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and SNR uniformity (SNRU), whose values are calculated using the mean signal and the standard deviation of ROIs defined within the phantom image or in the background. The variability of manual ROIs placement was emulated by the software using random variables that follow appropriate normal distributions. Results: Twenty-one paired sequences were employed. The automated test results for PIU were in good agreement with manual results. However, the PSG values were found to vary depending on the selection of ROIs with respect to the phantom. The values of SNR and SNRU also vary significantly, depending on the combination of the two out of the four standard rectangular ROIs. Furthermore, the methodology used for SNR and SNRU calculation also had significant effect on the results. Conclusions: The automated method standardizes the position of ROIs with respect to the ACR phantom image and allows for reproducible QC results.

[1]  C J Koller,et al.  A survey of MRI quality assurance programmes. , 2006, The British journal of radiology.

[2]  Mathias Davids,et al.  Fully-automated quality assurance in multi-center studies using MRI phantom measurements. , 2014, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[3]  G. Barker,et al.  Semiautomated quality assurance for quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. , 1992, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[4]  T. Ihalainen,et al.  MRI quality control: six imagers studied using eleven unified image quality parameters , 2004, European Radiology.

[5]  S C Williams,et al.  Quality control for functional magnetic resonance imaging using automated data analysis and Shewhart charting , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[6]  P L Carson,et al.  MRI scanner variability studies using a semi-automated analysis system. , 1994, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[7]  Atiba Omari Fitzpatrick.  Automated Quality Assurance for Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Extensions to Diffusion Tensor Imaging , 2005 .

[8]  R M Harrison,et al.  A comparison of two methods for measuring the signal to noise ratio on MR images , 1999, Physics in medicine and biology.

[9]  Martin J. Graves,et al.  MRI from Picture to Proton , 2017 .

[10]  F L Bookstein,et al.  Automated analysis of multiple performance characteristics in magnetic resonance imaging systems. , 1986, Medical physics.

[11]  J. D. de Certaines,et al.  Performance assessment and quality control in MRI by Eurospin test objects and protocols. , 1993, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[12]  Edward F. Jackson,et al.  Acceptance Testing and Quality Assurance Procedures for Magnetic Resonance Imaging Facilities , 2010 .

[13]  Juha I Peltonen,et al.  MRI quality assurance using the ACR phantom in a multi-unit imaging center , 2011, Acta oncologica.

[14]  D. Louis Collins,et al.  Automated Analysis of Multi Site MRI Phantom Data for the NIHPD Project , 2006, MICCAI.

[15]  D Gibon,et al.  Automatic quality assessment protocol for MRI equipment. , 1999, Medical physics.

[16]  Jason Dowling,et al.  An open source automatic quality assurance (OSAQA) tool for the ACR MRI phantom , 2014, Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine.

[17]  P L Carson,et al.  Detection of degradation of magnetic resonance (MR) images: comparison of an automated MR image-quality analysis system with trained human observers. , 1995, Academic radiology.

[18]  Karl Zilles,et al.  Automated quality assurance routines for fMRI data applied to a multicenter study , 2005, Human brain mapping.